Millennium3

The issue has to be resolved - it is a matter of fact. If the ST article is incorrect UKIP must demand an apology and retraction.

Voters will believe stories in the STimes and Telegraph [both considered 'serious' newspapers] over and above what NF or the UKIP website says.

Mark Croucher

How would I know? I'm just an ordinary member. But that the cheques were not banked in a head office account is no big deal: there are regional accounts which are the responsibility of the regional, not the national treasurer. It would depend on where, how and to whom the donation was made as to which account it was banked in. A misunderstanding over which account donations were banked in is hardly a 'hold the front page' story, is it? And of course, the key bit of the quote is the '.....' in the middle, which of course would set the context for the 'I have been badly mislead': what has been removed? 'I think the money has been stolen and I have been badly mislead', or 'the previous treasurer told me the cash was in the RBoS account, and yet cheques written on it have bounced. I have been badly mislead'. Without that key sentence, any assumptions which can be drawn are empty speculation. I find it laughable that people gripe about the media withholding the truth about the EU, and yet are prepared to accept as gospel any media stories which fit their agenda about UKIP.

Its worth remembering too that it was about this time, IIRC, that UKIP changed treasurers, so some level of confusion was inevitable.

Mark

John Page

Which of his statements would those be?

Bellatrix

How long do you have?

Mark Croucher

Well, the suggestion that continued liabilities after its mothballing are somehow unusual, despite the need to pay UBR, line rentals, equipment leases etc? Asking whether those who saw their money disappear would agree, when in fact no money has disappeared and audited accounts have been produced? I mean, lets face it, the '... pledge when he was elected in 2004' even gets the date of his initial election wrong by 5 years, so its hardly informed comment, is it.

Or there'sWhen the reason the call centre was in the South East was because the then treasurer insisted on operational management control of the call centre when it was in London, despite having no experience of call centre operations and the whole thing losing money hand over fist? Ignoring the cash paid to head office or directly to regions?

Or you could try the straw man argument - when the first statement is completely unconnected to the second. How much Nigel earns is unrelated to how much pensioners can afford to give. Nigel's salary is of course paid out of public funds, not party donations.

But of course, you knew all this already. The mundane explanation is as given elsewhere: The call centre opened in Ashford because the Hockney faction in London were holding the London call centre back. As a call centre, it not only raised funds, but also generated 11,000 new members, plus provided non-revenue raising services to the party, including advertisement & PEB/PPB response, general contact and polling which were financed out of its own earnings, saving the party considerable sums which it would have to have paid to an outside agency otherwise. And like any business, its abrupt closure has left outstanding liabilities which have to be met.

Mark

Bluemerle

Mark, I thought you had left UKIP to run a pub or something.

Mark Croucher

I've ceased to work for UKIP, but I remain a committed member - or is that a member who should be committed? I actually resigned in August/September 2005, but Roger asked me to stay on until his leadership came to an end, which I was happy to do, and then hung around for a bit to let Adrian get his feet under the table. Most of the leadership knew for 18 months or so that I'd be going in late 2006/early 2007, so I've watched with some amusement as the BNP tossers lead by Edwards suggest there was a huge rift, big bust-up, I'd been sacked, etc etc.

And yes, I've gone back to being a pub landlord, which is what I was doing immediately before working for UKIP. I'm hoping to complete the purchase on the 12th March, which is the day before my 41st, so a good **** up will follow! Of course, being a town centre pub, it will prove an excellent place to hang UKIP banners in the run up to May's local elections.... I'll post the details (free advertising) when I complete, and would welcome most UKIP members

Best regards,

Mark

brian lee

Coming back to the actual money.

The Ashford call centre was ringing people up all around the place to get money that they said was for the Party. People were relieved of vast sums of money on that basis. Jeffrey Titford and Tom Wise in the Eastern Region complained that their wives had been phoned. I understand also that during the period of the ill-fated Petition that cost the EU a few hundred thousand pounds, the Ashford Office office was asking for money to pay for it.

If money was taken from members they should know how and where it was spent. If the Ashford Office became part of the South Eastern Region set up, in other words, controlled by NF, this was taking money from members in another Region for what?

Then there is the matter of people phoning in as a result of press adverts. They would be pressured by the Ashford salesmen, using a prepared script, to join up for as long as possible. Having paid their money they would assume that it would go into the central funds. Well how much did? Indications are that only a fraction went into these. A common query, never properly answered, was that supposing someone signed up for five years, was there enough money paid into the central funds to service that person for five years? For that matter, was there enough to pay for one year? (We know that all the members who joined UKIP through the first call centre operation actually cost the Party money). If I recall correctly it was claimed the number of members gained was about 1,100.

The spokesmen for the Ashford Office couldn't claim it was part of the South Eastern Region whilst its salemen were saying they were acting for the Central Office.

Very little of the money appears to have been accounted for properly to the members although the rules for accounting may have been satisfied.

Bluemerle

I had forgotten about the phone calls from Ashford. some members got very upset at the pressure put on them by people employed to squeeze as much money as possible out of them.

michael mcgough

Anyone know the price of a loaf? Brian??????